The website of a Miami-based networking and security solutions reseller became inaccessible Monday, shortly after the company began advertising an unauthorized Mac clone for a fraction of the cost of Apple's cheapest system. Dubbed OpenMac, the USD 400 offering from Psystar Corporation is described as 'a low-cost high-performance computing platform' based on the ongoing OSX86Project - a hacker-based initiative aimed at maintaining a version of the Mac OS X operating system for everyday PCs. The website is back online now, and the machine has been renamed to Open Computer. Update:Psystar says they will continue to sell the Open Computer system, despite the fact that it appears to violate Apple's EULA. "We're not breaking any laws," they insisted.

At issue is Section 2A of the Mac OS X End User License Agreement (EULA), which stipulates that users are allowed "to install, use and run one (1) copy of the Apple Software on a single Apple-labeled computer at a time." As such, the OpenMac (and any other Mac system based on non-Apple hardware) would appear to stand in direct violation of Apple's terms.

But can the EULA legally uphold such a restriction of use if the user legally purchased an OS X licence?

Sure Apple can argue about a "non-support policy for non-apple hardware", but I really can't see how court could uphold such an EULA if the end user does legally pay for their OS X licence in the first place.